On Sat, 28 Feb 1998, Thomas Lunde wrote:
> Let me ask you
> a question? Why do humans have bad teeth? If evolution was all it is
> cracked up to be, surely we could have evolved out of tooth decay. If you
> have no teeth, it is pretty hard to chew grain or a hunk of meat.
Bad teeth before or a
Who said what? As usual, I won't try to figure that out (but
rather address myself to "the conversation we are", which
Husserl called: "transcendental intersubjectivity")
David Burman wrote:
>
> As a dentist, I can't resist this one! Tooth decay is a product of
> capitalist "civilization."
As a dentist, I can't resist this one! Tooth decay is a product of
capitalist "civilization." While the results of tooth decay could be severe
(abscesses could lead to death), before there were refined carbohydrates
(like white flour and sugar) tooth decay was relatively rare. In fact,
before mass
> So Brad, I disagree, it is not the perks of the office meeting or a
> businessman's lunch that keeps capitalism going, it is the perverting of
> life to a language that defines reality as a competition which of course is
> reinforced with sciences current love affair with evolution. Let me
My suggestion of starting the Basic Income with the 18-25 year old was
hinting at a possible point of departure. Let them (our youth) do with it
the way they see fit. I'm sure it couldn't be worst. Who knows, true
"educators" might just emerge from such a crowd of liberated (financially)
youths. T
This is in reply to Brad McCormick's posting in which he argues that "a more
nuanced sociological inequity" is the real or more real reason that
capitalism exists. It's an interesting thought. Yes, and what about the
"mob" and "pirates", perhaps it would be better to just label them "illegal
entr
--
Hi all,
[Thomas Lunde wrote...]
>Excuse me if this is a reposting.
>
>>--
>
>But my concern is for those,
>>who for whatever reason, do not want to be, or are unable to be,
>>'knowledge' workers.
>>
>>Will there be a place for them in our future economy? Sure, you can
>>retrai
> > I do not think our solution will come from industrialists or from
> > politicians. I think our solution will come from re-educating the public to
> > think of what they want and then to demand that in a way that those in power
> > become powerless to refuse. That education can come from a d
On Fri, 27 Feb 1998, Durant wrote:
>
> > > I do not think our solution will come from industrialists or from
> > > politicians. I think our solution will come from re-educating the public to
> > > think of what they want and then to demand that in a way that those in power
> > > become power
Arthur Cordell wrote:
On Fri, 27 Feb 1998, Thomas Lunde wrote:
snip, snip, snip.
> I do not think our solution will come from industrialists or from
> politicians. I think our solution will come from re-educating the public
to
> think of what they want and then to demand that in a way that
Arthur Cordell wrote,
> The change needed is profound. So profound that I have trouble
>finding a place to start (this especially now when children are being
>taught computer skills in kindergarten so they can become part of the new
>'educated' workforce.)
Actually, my four-year old is qu
On Fri, 27 Feb 1998, Thomas Lunde wrote:
snip, snip, snip.
> I do not think our solution will come from industrialists or from
> politicians. I think our solution will come from re-educating the public to
> think of what they want and then to demand that in a way that those in power
> be
Excuse me if this is a reposting.
>--
Jim Dator wrote:
But my concern is for those,
>who for whatever reason, do not want to be, or are unable to be,
>'knowledge' workers.
>
>Will there be a place for them in our future economy? Sure, you can
>retrain many workers, but we need decent job
>From: Thomas Lunde [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>Sent: Wednesday, 25 February 1998 11:20
>To:Future Work
>Cc: Hi Kathy & Robert &Chelsea & Bree; Gregory Roche
>Subject: Re FW - Some hard questions about basic income - 1
>
>This post is addressed to Eli
Brad wrote:
IMO, this is the *key*.
I seem to have lost the meaning of IMO which makes it hard to understand
several of your messages. Sorry about the large print, this blankity blank
program is not following it's set up or I don't know how to set it up. Grey
hairs are multiplying.
Respectf
>Tor Forde wrote:
>>
>> The danger that a Guaranted Annual Income is posing is that it can
>be a
>> way to put people away.
>[snip]
>> A Guaranteed Annual Income could be regarded as a kind of
>scholarship
>> that lasted as long as it will take for people to be able to make
>it on
>> their ow
Thomas Lunde wrote:
> Dear Tor:
> I appreciate your posting and your eloquent comments about everyone
> wanting to contribute. I seem to recall when reading the FW archives
> that you tried to start a small business growing something in the sea
> and that you were forced to discontinue it beca
Tor Forde wrote:
>
> Thomas Lunde wrote:
>
> > Dear Tor:
>
> > I appreciate your posting and your eloquent comments about everyone
> > wanting to contribute. I seem to recall when reading the FW archives
> > that you tried to start a small business growing something in the sea
> > and that you
This post is addressed to Elinor Mosher and Saul
Silverman under the original thread. First let me thank you both for great
answers and though I have read many of Galbraith's books and have found him
excellent, I have not read this one - next trip to library. As to your
answer Saul, great
Please consider this quote from a forward
posting to FW in January as an adjunct to my answer to Brad McCormicks message
about Greek politics. To me, it is a classical example of the
"elites" solution to their mistakes and they have the power to
socialize losses in the private sector onto
Tor Forde wrote:
>
> The danger that a Guaranted Annual Income is posing is that it can be a
> way to put people away.
[snip]
> A Guaranteed Annual Income could be regarded as a kind of scholarship
> that lasted as long as it will take for people to be able to make it on
> their own.
You know on
Franklin Wayne Poley wrote:
>
> If a basic income is NOT guarnteed, then who will be refused the basic
> amenities of life first? And who will decide who is most deserving of death?
> FWP.
What I wrote is that a Guaranteed Basic Income might be a less expensive
way to put people away than priso
The danger that a Guaranted Annual Income is posing is that it can be a
way to put people away.
I think everybody wants to make their part of the World their home, in
some away. By putting their mark on it, by understanding it, by defining
it, by creating a part of it. That is what people want!
I
Dear Tor:
I appreciate your posting and your eloquent
comments about everyone wanting to contribute. I seem to recall when
reading the FW archives that you tried to start a small business growing
something in the sea and that you were forced to discontinue it because you
could not find a
If a basic income is NOT guarnteed, then who will be refused the basic
amenities of life first? And who will decide who is most deserving of death?
FWP.
On Sun, 22 Feb 1998, Tor Forde wrote:
> The danger that a Guaranted Annual Income is posing is that it can be a
> way to put people away.
> I
Pete wrote:
(work) or perhaps regarded as a minor necessary
action expected ofany civilized human, to be done for a few hours a week, on
a parwith vacuuming the house; or perhaps both, depending on the type
ofwork required.
Thomas
Nice little essay. This quote, tied in
with Tom Walke
Andre Gouin wrote:
Guaranteed Annual Income (or some such) is not
about to come to be so longas it is not clear who's going to pay for
it.Reduced working time for the same income is also not about to come
intobeing so long as, again, it is not clear who is going to pay for it.
Thomas
Jim Dator <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Separating "work" entirely from access to goods and services, and
>permitting/enabling people to live meaningful, satisfied lives without
>"working" seems one of the biggest challenges of the present, and
>foreseable future. Trying to create more jobs is fu
28 matches
Mail list logo
